Friday, September 21, 2007

Men's Pants

What can be done about men's pants? I find them indescribably dull. The best you're going to get are jersey shorts with stuff written around the waistband. Ladies, in comparison, have a chocolate box of choice: lace, silk, satin, velvet, ribbons, ruffles, pin tucks and polka-dots, embroidery, sequins and a rainbow of colours. And that's just the knickers - what about all the bras (push-up, plunge, half cup) and bewildering arrays of corsetry?

Seriously though, what can you do with men's pants to make them more fun and sexy without also making them look camp and/or Village People bondage? Any sort of embellishment bar a brand label (scratchy)? Leather, rivets? No. Prints? I think not - may well cause sniggers when trousers are removed. (Any men out there with cartoon characters on their boxers, please ceremonially burn them now.) Obviously all the frills and furbelows listed above are out. So what, what, what?

Another problem with pants is that the area of the body they cover, unlike the female form, is not the most aesthetically pleasing. Men's pecs and shoulders - Mmm. Men's bottoms, often hairy and pale. What can be done to enhance?

Perhaps we can borrow from ladies' corsets and look at some interesting tailoring, with some seamage which follows the contours to refine, slim and enperken. Or enperten, depending on the view. *:)

What about the tease, a vital part of ladies' ware? Is there a way of getting that 'look but don't touch' into men's grundies? Perhaps the tease won't work with men, they're not usually known for being coy. We should be looking for something more butch - 'come and get it, laydees' pants.

Another big problem with all this is men themselves. They like to wear their pants for comfort. Not for them enduring being poked by underwires, scratched by lace or flossed all day by a thong. Would sexy pants with enperkening tailoring actually get worn? Something is telling me not.

Please, leave comments and suggestions. I lay down the challenge. There must be something out there for our poor men!

Embellishments are out, as are different materials, prints and frills. The area they cover isn't aesthetically pleasing. Men won't tease, and they only like comfort. As for hair, the difference between French and English women's armpit hair is cultural not innate. Male hair doesn't have to be a "problem".

So, with no options, we're dull by definition!

Do women (still?) really wear scratchy materials all day to be sexy? Don't you put this on for special occasions? Men can too. Not all prints are joke ones, and there's a place for those as funwear, for those that like them. Not all (women-liking) men find all supposedly sexy women's wear sexy - different strokes and all, some disapprove completely and some laugh. Not all female forms are seen as attractive by any (women-liking) man either - again different tastes. As for camp, this is an historical thing - the Tudors' court wear was then considered masculine; the Stuarts' wigs and white-painted faces too; the Georgian dandies, what we consider camp now was then height of fashion, notably on the most dangerously desireable male. Men were often gaudy, demonstrative, and hot.

Men's underwear is, perhaps, the last frontier, the last taboo. The problem now is this sniggering thing. If people snigger, men themselves and the women they wish to interest (some gay men are a little more adventurous, perhaps?), then *nothing* at all will ever be sexy for or on a man. Anyone who tries the novel is instantly put in the clown's enclosure. And if men's parts - whichever side - are seen as unaesthetic, and sniggered at as well, then there's perhaps not much point in trying to dress mutton as lamb, even if men retained the desire to try just for the ridicule. Better to be laughed at than ignored?

In writing the story that led me to find your next blog entry, I found dozens of men's underwear designers although they're not my topic. There are so, so many different styles, materials, colours, patterns: surely something, somewhere for everyone?

If men's underwear is so indescribably dull, it is both men and women who must choose to see this otherwise. The question is: what do women want to see? to feel? (or otherwise sense?) If women want these styles, and enough to encourage their use, then men will wear them!

Thanks anon. But sling thong with internal c-ring? Ball-bra? I think not. I think this could be the site that Ali G bought that neon thongkini thing from. That said, some of the jockey shorts are OK. Y-fronts are also a no-no unforts!

Well let's see... I agree with your opinion of mens undergarments. If they are designed for men by men, they would certainly have different options than if designed by women for the women to appreciate.

Mens designs would feature unstainable fabric, with an easy to drop waistband that reacts to the heat accumulating, and drops accordingly (no trying with one hand to get them off in a big hurry for these guys) stitching to provide some added bulk in certain areas, sort of like the padded bras women wear, easy in and out flap doors for full on scratching, when desired and oh yes, air conditioning.

Women on the other hand would design them with micro chips in them that scream "dirty" and "drop in laundry hamper you dummy", when they have been worn once. They would also have no opening in them which would force men to sit instead of standing, thereby eliminating the need for the to leave the seat up!